Just_me states that officially BMW quote 14.7s for the saloon which would mean a time of around 14.9~15.0s for the Estate version and yet the BMW M5 saloon has posted times as low as 13.5s which is a 1.2s better than official. Why doesn't everyone believe that the RS6 can equally do a similar thing and record mid thirteen second runs.

Guys I recommend holding off on the celebrations until a few official results come in.

That much power and not so much punch. They said a 60Kg lighter sedan is coming soon, anyone out there know what 60Kg is in pounds? 120? 150? I dont honestly think the performance will be any better. I am pretty sure it will come close to or match the M5's performance in the strait line but from the looks of things on the track the big E60 still has it!!! next challenge: CTS-V

Just_me states that officially BMW quote 14.7s for the saloon which would mean a time of around 14.9~15.0s for the Estate version and yet the BMW M5 saloon has posted times as low as 13.5s which is a 1.2s better than official. Why doesn't everyone believe that the RS6 can equally do a similar thing and record mid thirteen second runs.

Guys I recommend holding off on the celebrations until a few official results come in.

Just_me is accurate as they come. I am sure if you ask he can dig up the acceleration tests. The M5 is still faster in a straight-line than the new RS6.

I have a bet with an Audi guy on the M5board. I bet a stock M5 will beat the RS6 at Gustav's airfield runs...... I made this bet once I found out it was sub 600 hp.... I am going to win this bet.

Do you know why I am going to win Footie? Because Quattro eats power. This is not my usually bashing....this is just a sad fact for the engineers at Ingolstadt.

You cannot compensate for weight and poor handling with power....

The most telling fact that Audi has lost, again, is they are considering the RS6 Plus.... A6, S6, RS6 and RS6+

Sorry Audi loses.

__________________

"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari

Autocar tested both the RS4 and M3. The big surprise was that both cars were so evenly matched, right up to 150mph the only thing that separated them was 0.3s. So even with identical power, more weight and quattro the RS4 was only 0.3s slower to 150mph.

What does that tell you about your opinion that quattro eats power?

If Audi are considering a RS6+ then the chances are they are safe guarding the fact that BMW will be upping the power of the M5, it's as simple as that.

I hope for your sake that the M5 is quicker because if not you WILL get some bashing from me, that's for sure.

Autocar tested both the RS4 and M3. The big surprise was that both cars were so evenly matched, right up to 150mph the only thing that separated them was 0.3s. So even with identical power, more weight and quattro the RS4 was only 0.3s slower to 150mph.

From all the videos I've seen the M3 pulls ahead quite a bit more than that. Check youtube

Autocar tested both the RS4 and M3. The big surprise was that both cars were so evenly matched, right up to 150mph the only thing that separated them was 0.3s. So even with identical power, more weight and quattro the RS4 was only 0.3s slower to 150mph.

What does that tell you about your opinion that quattro eats power?

If Audi are considering a RS6+ then the chances are they are safe guarding the fact that BMW will be upping the power of the M5, it's as simple as that.

I hope for your sake that the M5 is quicker because if not you WILL get some bashing from me, that's for sure.

I would love to see another review get Autocar's number for the RS4. No one on this planet believes the RS4 is anywhere near as fast as the M3 beyond 100 meters.

Do you want videos from the airfield again?

The RS6 has already been tested and has been beat by a 2 year old car.

__________________

"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari

I will hunt out the Autocar book and scan the feature but there is no denying that the M3 was only 0.3s aheah at the 150mph mark. And I think but am not sure that the RS4 will they own car and not one supplied by Audi, so no super fast press car in other words.

Like wise when comparing the old M3 with the then S4v8 Avant at the 0-100-0 contest the M3 was only 0.3s quicker to 100mph and was only 0.8s ahead at the end of the straight (can't remember the exact distance), the M3 had reached 143mph, so again here is a much heavier Audi with quattro being only slightly slower.

This is not me disproving that the M3 in both cases isn't quick cars, only that they aren't that much quicker than there competitors and this myth that quattro is eating piles of power isn't true.

I haven't raced any E46 M3s with my S5 but I reckon I would stand a pretty good chance of winning against a stock car and yet both have identical power to weight ratios.

I will hunt out the Autocar book and scan the feature but there is no denying that the M3 was only 0.3s aheah at the 150mph mark. And I think but am not sure that the RS4 will they own car and not one supplied by Audi, so no super fast press car in other words.

Like wise when comparing the old M3 with the then S4v8 Avant at the 0-100-0 contest the M3 was only 0.3s quicker to 100mph and was only 0.8s ahead at the end of the straight (can't remember the exact distance), the M3 had reached 143mph, so again here is a much heavier Audi with quattro being only slightly slower.

This is not me disproving that the M3 in both cases isn't quick cars, only that they aren't that much quicker than there competitors and this myth that quattro is eating piles of power isn't true.

I haven't raced any E46 M3s with my S5 but I reckon I would stand a pretty good chance of winning against a stock car and yet both have identical power to weight ratios.

Can you explain this?

or this?

0-60 RS4 is good....after that it gets walked because of the drivetrain losses

__________________

"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari

"Forget that the RS6 is capable of carrying up to five adults and a sizable load of luggage. This is a brutally fast car by any standards. There's no magic trick to extracting the performance in a straight line."

"Top speed is electronically capped at 155 mph, although Audi offers RS6 owners an opportunity to extend it to 174 mph. You'll be glad to know that Stephan Reil, the RS6's development boss, says he saw 205 mph during final prototype testing on a secret section of autobahn late last year"

"The engine really steals the show. There is meaningful boost from little more than 1,000 rpm and from then on, the floodgates open. Midrange power is one maddening thrust toward the horizon, with the power laid on at a barely believable rate. It is rare for a turbocharged engine to feel as strong at the top end as it does down low, but the RS6's V10 is still hammering hard with a deep baritone blare when the rev limiter cuts in abruptly at 6,800 rpm."

"Look upon the RS6 as an extremely fast car with colossal all-weather traction, with no real ambition as a lithe sports car with whip-crack response. Though it feels more at home in a straight line, it also manages to devour twisting roads with an impressive turn of speed. The tires grip well beyond what is safely achievable on the road"

"The brakes are beyond reproach, and they still feel strong even after being hammered lap after lap on a racetrack." - I heard it went 86 laps without fade.